Well this all depends on the situation. If someone is constantly positive about one thing, while often putting down others, their opinion has now moved into chest-beaitng (which is usually followed, or accompanied, by Trolling). 

No. People would be able to say what they want within the normal rules unless they clearly step over them or using a proxy. I have a problem with splitting hairs to find a meaning that might be there and using that as a cause to ban someone over something that doesn't break the rules but offends people for whatever reason like Kerotan's post. A controversial or offensive-only-to-a-small-group opinion spoken a few times doesn't make it trolling so saying the same things a hundred times more doesn't make it trolling regardless if it infuriates a group or not. Especially if the comment is related to the topic, you shouldn't be able to conflate a post that doesn't break any rules outright with trolling. At that point, you can permaban someone because they can't walk a tightrope. Do you really think this sort of shit is a big deal? How much time do you think the mods waste dicking around with trying to figure if an innocent post is indeed trolling or just a user giving a controversial opinion?

There's a huge difference in between the level of chaos just giving an opinion that's not liked repeatedly and people indirectly attacking others using loopholes with the intent to troll or flame. I think users using loopholes to attack others is a bigger problem and it's tolerated to the point of being ignored. 

Attacking others' character by attacking public persons or groups or other person's character traits but because the groups or persons are of the outside of gaming it's not seen as a trolling or flaming. ugh. It's an asisinine loophole that a lot of people use to jab at eachother especially the users who been here awhile. *wink wink  An easy example of this is "People who voted for trump are idiots". You can call anyone anything using that method. Another example of this "If you were a video character, I wonder if you would be related to Sandel...". Sometimes, this stuff is moderated and often times it's not. It just depends on far it's pushed. 

Another practice that I've noticed but it is allowed is a user (an alt likely) says something that gets them banned or moderated that's really bad but 50 people reply to it say they agree to the post or expand on the spirit of it without any risk of moderaton. They are more saying themselves but the proxy took the fall for it. This is related in a way to posting videos or articles with things in them if written out in the forum would get them banned but because it's someone else's opinion or content, it's given a pass. 

Here's an example of that. 

People love this spanish guy meme. I remember it was a little way back but this one (below) was used in a spiderman thread and it was not taken well. 

This stuff is actual stealth trolling because it's safe from moderation thanks to the rules framed and the intent behind them is often to cause mischief. To be honest, the mods could have changed some of the ways they've handle those but definitely not all. i don't know how arguing over numbers or sales predictions could be seen as trolling but me calling someone an idiot is a roundabout way or using a vid to do it is not. 

People should be able to handle disagreeable opinions (especially if they are civil) on the internet without being offended or feeling compelled to flag or moderate a person. That's not a perfect or ideal world but a very rational and sensible one. If they can't then yes they should grow some thicker skin. I rather the community be able to express any opinions just so long as they are not attacking or indirectly attacking others. It's the least toxic with the best chances at geniune discussion and it doesn't favor any groups who report excessively. I don't care if someone is wrong and they want to say that thing a hundred times but it bothers some people. Tough titty. 

I have more faith in the community than what your worst case scenario implies about them being unable to handle opinions. I think they'll get used to it, adapt, debate and converse with others. The whole point of coming here is not for numbers or getting into a circle jerk echo chamber but to converse with others who have a similar hobby. Debating and disagreeing is a part of that. 

Maybe it's just because I am Austrian, but in the German-speaking countries being called a nazi or nazi sympathizer includes being labeled an idiot by default. That's because it takes an idiot - and not just a low level one, but a high rank idiot - to take such a stance. If there's no truth to someone being a nazi or a sympathizer, it is an insult of the highest grade. It constitutes labeling someone as one of the worst people alive without any justification.

This shouldn't be judged by an individual identifying themself as such a person, but rather based on the evidence in the thread and by extension the posting history.

No. People would be able to say what they want within the normal rules unless they clearly step over them or using a proxy. I have a problem with splitting hairs to find a meaning that might be there and using that as a cause to ban someone over something that doesn't break the rules but offends people for whatever reason like Kerotan's post. A controversial or offensive-only-to-a-small-group opinion spoken a few times doesn't make it trolling so saying the same things a hundred times more doesn't make it trolling regardless if it infuriates a group or not. Especially if the comment is related to the topic, you shouldn't be able to conflate a post that doesn't break any rules outright with trolling. At that point, you can permaban someone because they can't walk a tightrope. Do you really think this sort of shit is a big deal? How much time do you think the mods waste dicking around with trying to figure if an innocent post is indeed trolling or just a user giving a controversial opinion?

There's a huge difference in between the level of chaos just giving an opinion that's not liked repeatedly and people indirectly attacking others using loopholes with the intent to troll or flame. I think users using loopholes to attack others is a bigger problem and it's tolerated to the point of being ignored. 

Attacking others' character by attacking public persons or groups or other person's character traits but because the groups or persons are of the outside of gaming it's not seen as a trolling or flaming. ugh. It's an asisinine loophole that a lot of people use to jab at eachother especially the users who been here awhile. *wink wink  An easy example of this is "People who voted for trump are idiots". You can call anyone anything using that method. Another example of this "If you were a video character, I wonder if you would be related to Sandel...". Sometimes, this stuff is moderated and often times it's not. It just depends on far it's pushed. 

Another practice that I've noticed but it is allowed is a user (an alt likely) says something that gets them banned or moderated that's really bad but 50 people reply to it say they agree to the post or expand on the spirit of it without any risk of moderaton. They are more saying themselves but the proxy took the fall for it. This is related in a way to posting videos or articles with things in them if written out in the forum would get them banned but because it's someone else's opinion or content, it's given a pass. 

Here's an example of that. 

People love this spanish guy meme. I remember it was a little way back but this one (below) was used in a spiderman thread and it was not taken well. 

This stuff is actual stealth trolling because it's safe from moderation thanks to the rules framed and the intent behind them is often to cause mischief. To be honest, the mods could have changed some of the ways they've handle those but definitely not all. i don't know how arguing over numbers or sales predictions could be seen as trolling but me calling someone an idiot is a roundabout way or using a vid to do it is not. 

People should be able to handle disagreeable opinions (especially if they are civil) on the internet without being offended or feeling compelled to flag or moderate a person. That's not a perfect or ideal world but a very rational and sensible one. If they can't then yes they should grow some thicker skin. I rather the community be able to express any opinions just so long as they are not attacking or indirectly attacking others. It's the least toxic with the best chances at geniune discussion and it doesn't favor any groups who report excessively. I don't care if someone is wrong and they want to say that thing a hundred times but it bothers some people. Tough titty. 

I have more faith in the community than what your worst case scenario implies about them being unable to handle opinions. I think they'll get used to it, adapt, debate and converse with others. The whole point of coming here is not for numbers or getting into a circle jerk echo chamber but to converse with others who have a similar hobby. Debating and disagreeing is a part of that. 

 So? You're proving my point with making him sound nefarious for being overexcited or overreactive to something. That's really splitting hairs to justify it.  These are almost of micro-pet peeves or annoyances. It's a far cry from trolling unless you use a very broad stroke.  It sounds like a strong bias on his part but that's it in my opinion.

So you're telling me this? "Woo hoo, my team did really well. Woo hoo." ....in a dark corner, the others grow annoyed when the noise of his celebration reaches them.....  "Woo hoo. Woo Hoo. My team won. Woo Hoo".     .......They begin to growl as their rage begins to boil out of control....       As the happy go luck frog finally decides to move on, he is swallowed up by the darkness of the others......    ..as they begin to calm down they realize they need to justify their actions.....In hushed whispers, they rationlize it out...... "the evil frog was asking for it! He was taunting us with his hopping about"....."what right does he have to flaunt"......"That evil frog was plotting.....it must have been".... "no way we could lose control".....that damn frog...

If that's how you perceive the situation, then your sense of judgment is clearly broken.

Aeolus is right though - he painted a good picture of the situation. Your sense of judgement is not the right sense of judgement, btw - it's only your own.